drbobfandomcom-20200214-history
Problem of Evil
“God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains: it is His megaphone to rouse a deaf world.” – C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain The''' Problem of Evil''' originally comes from Epicurus, and dates to about 300 B.C. It states: “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” The Problem of Evil argument claims that since evil occurs, either God cannot prevent evil, or God is evil himself. It's the best argument against God that there is, but it's still an incredibly weak argument. 'Addressing the Problem' "Humans are funny creatures. We tend to take credit for what goes right, even when we have nothing to do with it, and we tend to place blame when things go wrong, even when it's no one's fault by our own. If life had no other evil, then I think we'd perceive things like broken fingernails and lost change to be evil. Without negatives, we'd have only an idyllic life, and we'd never perceive a need for God in our lives. We'd live happily, headed to eternal separation from God. Evil serves a great, very beneficial purpose, I think." - Dr. Bob This argument is the best argument there is against God. The problem with it, however, it that it's still a poor argument and it suffers from two wrong assumptions. *First, it assumes that God must serve man, making life easy and idyllic for him. That's a silly assumption without any logical foundation. *Second, it assumes that there is no greater good that comes about as a result of suffering. Surely this is also false, and we can see it in action every day. For instance, think about the earthquake in Haiti that left so many buildings destroyed and so many without homes. That was surely suffering. However, builders, doctors, money, supplies, and other beneficial things immediately were on their way to Haiti, and many people there are surely better off, better cared for, and in better quality homes than they were before. Changes to the law and to building codes carry long-lasting benefits. 'Philosophy' Leibniz said that the Problem of Evil argument makes faulty assumptions. It assumes that God exists to make life idyllic and peaceful for man, rather than man existing for God. He argued (successfully) that the Problem of Evil puts man in the position of being served by God. He also pointed out that the Problem of Evil assumes that greater good cannot come about as a result of tragedy and pain. However, in our experience, great good does indeed come about as a result of tragedy. And thus the Problem of Evil of argument -- though it's probably the strongest argument against God's existence -- is still very weak. 'Preventing Evil' The argument assumes that God must prevent evil. This is an idea that's incompatible with Biblical teaching (both Old and New Testament). The Bible says that bad things can be used to accomplish God's will, and even people who don't believe in God can be used to serve him. #In the book of Job, Job's life is turned upside down by Satan in an attempt to harm his faith in God. Out of this, God blesses Job even more greatly than he had already been blessed. #Joseph, sold by his brothers into captivity, becomes the Egyptian Pharaoh's most-trusted advisor, and through divine visions help Egypt prepare for a great famine, where he then is able to help his own family. Joseph tells his brothers, "You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good." #In the Exodus, Pharaoh refused to allow God to be glorified and kept the Israelites enslaved. God used Pharaoh's refusal to bend to both free the Israelites and to bring glory to himself. Over and over again in scripture we see these kinds of things happening. These "evil" events bring glory to God, and when people come to know God, it makes the difference of eternity in their lives. It's clear then that (1) Epicurus' assumption that God must be somehow obligated to prevent evil is simply a wrong assumption, and so the Problem of Evil argument against God simply fails. The Problem of Evil also (2) assumes that there cannot be greater good to come about from "evil" things, and as each of these examples above shows, quite frequently good things do come about as a result of what we perceive as evil. We do not need to show that evil results in better things, or that God is not obligated to prevent evil; all we need to do is show that the possibility of these things exists, and it renders the argument ineffective. 'Good out of Bad' In reality, we see the most positive things in humanity come about as a result of tragedy. People respond to God. They minister to others. They provide medical care. They pray. They feed the hungry. They donate money and time and resources to help others. They make investments that bring about jobs, which improve economies. They care for others. They grow themselves. Although there is a lot of misery, there is also a lot of good that comes about as a result of these sorts of things, good that would not occur if the disaster didn't happen. Without suffering, we'd all be lazy, selfish, cold-hearted bastards, like it or not. Good does come about as a result of suffering. In fact, it is suffering that spurns us to get off of our lazy butts and do good for other people. 'Related Topics' *Euthyphro Dilemma Category:Dr. Bobisms